Monday, December 22, 2008

Enlightened leadership can make all the difference. Even with superior numbers, a team without fast thinking people at the helm will find that it will soon be cannibalized by smaller but better organized teams. So what makes for great commanding?

Too many cooks...

Team dynamics will ultimately determine if the command structure will be an inclusive meritocracy, or will become something more closely resembling a military dictatorship. A handy rule of thumb, however, is that the fewer the people calling the shots, the less opportunity there is for miscommunication.

Unless significant effort is put into assigning roles, it is inevitable that Commanders will find themselves issuing contradicting orders and possibly scaring off potential allies as a result. And of course, every additional Commander is yet another opportunity for an enterprising spy to maneuver his way into a position to cause maximum damage, an unfortunate lesson that the Jedis had to learn recently in the Star Wars game.

The danger of too few commanders, however, is that good ideas might never come to the table. An atmosphere conducive for players to contribute tactical suggestions via team chat is one compromise.

Commander roles

The various functions that a commander has to perform can be grouped into four broad "commander types":

1. The Diplomat: who coordinates alliances and overseers spy efforts.

2. The Tactician: in charge of finalizing troop movements.

3. The Punisher: who enforces site rules and mediates between disputing players.

4. The Comrade: who maintains high team morale and a fun atmosphere.

The relative order of importance of these roles is up for debate, and commanders will find that different points in the game will call for different approaches. The majority of players certainly seems to agree that the Tactician's job is more important than the Diplomat's, and that both of them are more important than the Comrade and the Punisher, respectively.

My personal order is Comrade, Tactician, Diplomat and Punisher, due to my experience in my very first GXC game, GoCrossZodiac (any GXZodiac veterans around?). The team was Gemini & Cancer, and as victory seemed increasingly assured, a treacherous ally quickly whittled us down to one territory. Although defeat was very clearly imminent (we didn't have force shields then) the inspiring leadership of Cdr. James Westmoreland and Cdr. Karen Mack reminded us that the glory was not in the winning, but in the experience. We would go on to repeatedly fireball our way through the territories of our encircling enemies, and even long after we were eliminated, the members of team Gemini & Cancer could be found actively engaging each other on the team chat - a team spirit reinforced by the camaraderie encouraged by the commanders.

Tactics, diplomacy and the enforcement of rules will all result in victory, but the game should never get in the way of a good time. It is atmosphere that will encourage players to recruit friends unto the team, and make playing worthwhile.

A Winning Formula

Unlike most other games, GXC is pretty easy to jump into. This is reflective in the fact that people who are active on the chats, rather than players who have previously served as Commanders, are more likely to be voted Commander.

Nothing appeals like success, however. Commanders who have the Battle Plan up promptly, those who interact frequently on the chats and those whose tactics bring in the territories are less likely to face the guillotine than nice Commanders who are simply ineffective. In fact, players are more likely to tolerate a tactless Commander than a genial, but hapless one. Charisma simply cannot make up for incompetence.

What makes a great Commander?

Vision, agility, and an enlightened recognition of your responsibilities towards your teammates. And this. And also possibly this.

Players have their own scorecard, though, and some were kind enough to reveal theirs to us:

Well, I was a part of Zodiac, on Green (along with Justine). We tried to take everybody on, and then blue/light blue allied and light blue did enough to smack us down for blue. We took out James and Karen though, HAHAHA.

I would like to point out that the newer Commanders (especially those who got 4 votes), have been burning out and are taking either reduced roles or quitting being a commander entirely. I voted for Justine because of the Office and her masterful handling of Orange, though I could have easily gone for Hoy (before the multis). Also though, Allison Sproul, James (as mentioned), and Sarah Sperry were good.

There's one X Factor that I think divides the good ones from the GREAT ones, and that is desire. I know that when I join a team and especially when I become a commander, I want to win EVERY TIME. I MEAN EVERY TIME (CAPS means emphasis for me).

If I feel like I got shafted (like a Lightning game), I will let people know (and then just to drive the point home let them know some more even when I am over it). I give out orders, and will gladly tell people why I said to do that. I will also go to great lengths to prove that I am right and correct wrong people.

Of course, desire doesn't make one great, but it is that little bit that makes the difference provided you don't go off the deep end like I did in the Office game. I agree that Tactical is the best, follow by Diplomacy and then Punisher and such. Experience helps, but really it only takes one good game with a little guidance to get the necessary experience.

I know I learned plenty from my first time as Commander- like the former multi problem that has been fixed for Arena games, that if you are losing you are blamed, and that dividing a team because of a power struggle never works. I took a hit from that game, but gained it back and then some (I hope).

Anyway, I just wanted to put my 5 cents in, as I only had a nickel on me and wanted my money's worth. As I learned the hard way, so I don't want future GXCers to do what I did- you might not survive. I'd be open to possibly contributing a piece per week as well.-Chase

I can vouch for Chase's desire for letting people hear it about lightning games. (Helloooo, Narnia...)

As this (SW) is my first Arena game command post, Chase's points are valid, but desire doesn't by itself translate to results (as my team members can likely fault me readily for). There's a decent amount of balance involved (and any experience at all helps).

Just for the record, I didn't quit. I'm in India. Sporadic internet access and the double digit number of hours commanders spend on this game don't go together =/

I'm starting to believe more and more that Diplomacy is actually more important to this game than tactics. The fact is, a team with crappy tactics can still win if the commander knows how to play the other teams, and a team with brilliant tactics will be defeated time and time again by opponents who simply know how to make better allies...

Therefore, to do a team justice, the command group must be able to provide both top notch diplomacy and decent tactics. That will win over brilliant tactics and bad diplomacy every time.

If you need evidence, look at the current Star Wars game. The Sith should be dead; diplomacy (a three pronged alliance) was annihilating them, and diplomacy (a switch by the Jedi) saved them. Tynna (the wookie fort) should have bled the Stormtroopers dry, but diplomacy handed it to us and saved the Wookies from a Droid-Stormtrooper double team. While tactics are essential early in the game when making your initial empire, once you get into a stalemate you have to rely on diplomacy...

Ok, here are my thoughts. I was really undecided about whether or not to post this cuz I'm really shooting myself in the foot if people see this and I ever command again.

Anyways...In order of importance:1) Picking a winning team (duh)2) Coming up with a plan to win. - involves looking at the map and finding important territories and finding the teams that will be long term players or threats3) Making alliances- you need one ally that is more equal than the rest. Find this ally early and cultivate the alliance throughout the whole game. The only way to come out the winner is to make sure that when it comes down to two (maybe three) teams, you have the best endgame strategy.- you'll also need alliances of convenience. If you can demonstrate a common goal with another team, ally!4) Stick to your alliances- don't backstab. Nobody will ally with you in future games. There are always circumstances outside your control, but I can honestly say that I've never led another team on just to stab them in the back down the road.5) Create a special forces or something similar- be this people that you live with or a great email list, you need people that can fill in holes at the last minute6) Get spies- You'll need to know accurate numbers so that you can tweak defense/attack and utilize every single army (energy) to the best of its ability7) Eliminate the teams that pose the largest threat- pretty self explanatory...

Bottom line is that you need to be able to read other commanders (mostly over AIM, also through their BPs and chat messages) to know what they're going to do before they do it. If you ever get surprised, you've lost. Think about every possibility and have a plan for every contingency. What if your closest ally stabs you in the back? Way back when, my only reasonable solution to that was to get on AIM and tell the other commander that if he did that, we'd surely lose, but I'd make sure that his team lost first. The alliance fell apart soon after, but not before we got the one crucial chokehold that spurred us on to victory.

That's about it for now. I don't want to post a list of top commanders (IMO) because people all lead differently and different styles can work well together. But Chi's certainly at the top of any list. Get on his good side. :) Justine also for sentimental reasons. I think the only game that we weren't allied you crushed us like dogs. She also is the single best commander for motivating a team. When we tracked participation, her teams were consistently 10% or so higher than the rest.

I'm always willing to chat on AIM if you're bored or want to talk GXC. I could probably even be convinced to play another game or two if the right circumstances came up. I liked it better when there was only one game at a time and there were huge teams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Office game was the largest open game? (ILC rules all...)

I want to thank the blogger very much not only for this post but also for his all previous efforts. I found blog.gocrosscampus.com to be extremely interesting. I will be coming back to blog.gocrosscampus.com for more information.

I want to thank the blogger very much not only for this post but also for his all previous efforts. I found blog.gocrosscampus.com to be very interesting. I will be coming back to blog.gocrosscampus.com for more information.

Hello .. firstly I would like to send greetings to all readers. After this, I recognize the content so interesting about this article. For me personally I liked all the information. I would like to know of cases like this more often. In my personal experience I might mention a book called Generic Viagra in this book that I mentioned have very interesting topics, and also you have much to do with the main theme of this article.

This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. I enjoy seeing websites that understand the value of providing a prime resource for free. I truly loved reading your post. Thanks!

I suppose that anti-democratic nature of the leadership principle is challenged by the introduction of concepts such as autogestion, employeeship, common civic virtue, etc., which stress individual responsibility and/or group authority in the work place and elsewhere by focusing on the skills

A comprehensive fitness program tailored to an own wish undoubtedly nave on sole or more clear-cut skills, and on age-[3] or health-related needs such as bone health.[4] Numberless sources[citation needed] also cite disposition, sexual and heated fettle as an substantial purposes of all-inclusive fitness. This is again presented in textbooks as a triangle made up of three points, which impersonate solid, poignant, and mental fitness. Incarnate good shape can also prevent or investigate various inveterate well-being conditions brought on next to detrimental lifestyle or aging.[5] Working pass‚ can also serve people snore better. To visit robust it is important to engage in navy surgeon activity. Training

Specific or task-oriented [url=http://www.pella.pl]fitness[/url] is a living soul's power to fulfil in a identified with activity with a sound expertise: as pattern, sports or military service. Certain training prepares athletes to perform wonderfully in their sports.

Examples are:

400 m sprint: in a sprint the athlete should be trained to work anaerobically throughout the race. Marathon: in this what really happened the athlete have to be trained to work aerobically and their perseverance requisite be built-up to a maximum. Many blazing fighters and constabulary officers subject oneself to level aptness testing to act on if they are masterly of the physically exacting tasks required of the job. Members of the Collective States Army and Army Nationalist Look after necessity be proficient to pass the Army Material Good shape Check up on (APFT).

I think a somewhat thinner rattan cane was the standard implement for school corporal punishment in England and Wales, and is still used for this purpose in schools in Singapore, Malaysia and several African countries